Kaso maaaring isampa sa driver na nakabundol at namatay

ni Atty. Persida Rueda-Acosta - @Magtanong Kay Attorney | August 5, 2022

Dear Chief Acosta,

Ang kapatid ko ay namatay matapos siyang mabundol ng rumaragasang trak. Matapos ang imbestigasyon ng mga pulis, isinampa ang kasong Murder, kung saan ang naging qualifying circumstance ay “Use of a Motor Vehicle”. Matapos ang naging pagdinig sa aming kaso, naglabas ang huwes ng desisyon na nagsasabing ang nagmamaneho ng trak ay guilty lamang ng Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide. Tama ba ito? - Jhundi

Dear Jhundi,

Ang sagot sa iyong katanungan ay sinagot ng Korte Suprema sa kaso ng People of the Philippines v. Zaldy Salahuddin, G.R. No. 206291, January 18, 2016, na isinulat ni Kagalang-galang na Dating Punong Mahistrado Diosdado M. Peralta, kung saan tinalakay kung kailan makokonsidera ang qualifying circumstance na “use of a motor vehicle”. Ayon sa Korte Suprema:

“Meanwhile, the use of a motor vehicle is aggravating when it is used either to commit the crime or to facilitate escape, but not when the use thereof was merely incidental and was not purposely sought to facilitate the commission of the offense or to render the escape of the offender easier and his apprehension difficult. In People v. Herbias, the Court held

The use of a motor vehicle may likewise be considered as an aggravating circumstance that attended the commission of the crime. The records show that assailants used a motorcycle in trailing and overtaking the jeepney driven by Saladio after which appellant’s back rider mercilessly riddled with his bullets the body of Jeremias. There is no doubt that the motorcycle was used as a means to commit the crime and to facilitate their escape after they accomplished their mission.

The prosecution has proven through the testimonies of Java and Delos Reyes that appellant was riding a motorcycle behind the unknown driver when he twice shot Atty. Segundo who thus lost control of his owner-type jeep and crashed into the interlink wire fence beside the road. The motorcycle then stopped near the jeep, and the appellant shot Atty. Segundo again thrice, before leaving the crime scene aboard the motorcycle. Clearly, the trial court correctly appreciated the generic aggravating circumstance of use of motor vehicles in the commission of the crime.” (Emphasis ours)

Sang-ayon sa nasabing desisyon, upang makonsidera ang qualifying circumstance na “use of a motor vehicle”, dapat tahasang ginamit ang sasakyan upang maisagawa ang krimen o upang makatakas mula sa pinangyarihan ng krimen. Sa iyong kaso, ang iyong kapatid ay napatay matapos mabundol ng rumaragasang trak. Walang nabanggit sa iyong liham, na intensyunal ang pagpatay sa iyong kapatid at tahasang pinili ng akusado ang paggamit ng trak para gawin ito. Kung gayon nga, ang nangyari ay krimen na hindi sinasadya at hindi tahasang ginamit ang trak, kaya ibinaba ng huwes ang kaso sa Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide.

Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang inyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa impormasyon na inyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng inyong salaysay.

Maraming salamat sa inyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.